How to improve workplace safety

American workplaces are much safer than they used to be. While we have mostly succeeded in banishing the Dickensian working conditions that cost untold thousands of workers their lives and limbs at the turn of the last century, the important work of keeping employees safe is far from over. In 2014 alone, a staggering 4,800 workers were killed on the job in the U.S. — 13 lives lost every day — and employers reported nearly 3 million injuries and illnesses.

The Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration hopes that transparency can change all that. OSHA recently introduced a new rule that will make data on injuries and illnesses public for certain large employers. This should not be a difficult task for these companies; they already collect and maintain this data in the workplace. The rule, which takes effect in 2017, merely asks them to file the data electronically, which brings antiquated record keeping into the 21st century without increasing collection burdens.

By publicly disclosing information on injuries and illnesses, OSHA will harness the power of transparency to mobilize employers, workers, unions, and health and safety administrators in their efforts to make workplaces safer. However, congressional Republicans, with the backing of business groups, have indicated their opposition to OSHA’s new rule. If Congress were to roll back this move, it would undermine a vital tool for shedding light on the working conditions of millions of Americans.

The rule, which was finalized in May, requires workplaces with over 250 employees and smaller employers in high-risk industries, like construction and waste collection, to turn over data on injuries and illnesses to OSHA. The agency will then make this data public at the workplace level, while removing information that could identify the employees who suffered injuries or illnesses.

Employers and trade associations will be able to easily compare worker safety data across industry and better identify safety gaps, evaluate their own safety protocols and find ways to reduce injuries and illnesses.

Other actors in the marketplace, such as buyers and public contracting officers, may use the data to select safer suppliers — and investors and insurers may use it to demand safety improvements. In other fields, transparency has prompted the industry to identify and reduce risks. When hospitals were required to collect and disclose information about their quality, they were able to address safety gaps they had overlooked. After the Environmental Protection Agency required firms to disclose toxic pollutants released into the environment, certain investors and buyers down the supply chain demanded emission cuts. Some employers may fear being embarrassed by the disclosure of a poor safety performance, the same way restaurants were when low hygiene grades started hanging on their windows. But beyond shaming, transparency can be a powerful tool for employers who are willing to learn and serious about making workplaces safer.

In 2014, OSHA and its state partners were able to inspect a meager 1 percent of establishments under OSHA’s authority. Transparency can help OSHA target its limited resources to make workplaces safer. Safety administrators will analyze the data to not only direct inspections, but also to offer free assistance and feedback to the establishments that need the most help. This is a win for workers, employers and regulators.

Transparency will also assist OSHA in identifying unexpected trends in workforce safety. For example, only a year after requiring employers to report serious events, like amputations, loss of an eye or hospitalizations, OSHA learned that many workers operating food slicers at supermarkets were suffering fingertip amputations. In response, OSHA reached out to the industry with information on simple ways to keep workers safe when using slicers.

Employees are entitled to review their employers’ injury-and-illness records but rarely do so for fear of raising suspicion or losing their jobs. With OSHA disclosing the data, they will be able to freely learn about safety at their own workplace and compare it with that at similar work sites. The new rule introduces protections to encourage workers to report injuries and illnesses, while shielding them from retribution from employers. While it may be hard for individual employees to challenge employers on their safety record, unions and advocates can use transparency to focus on employers who pose unreasonable risks to their workforce.

The data will also stimulate analysis from journalists, health and safety advocacy groups and researchers to single out threats; identify best and worst places to work; and track improvement over time.

Industry is concerned that the privacy of employees suffering injuries and illnesses may be at risk, but OSHA will not disclose information that could identify employees and will review and scrub the data. Reporting should be easy and user-friendly, to reduce the burden on small businesses and protect data quality. OSHA’s gradual phase-in of electronic reporting in three years should ensure a smooth transition into the digital age. Most important, employers should be able to reap the benefits of transparency. Analytical tools like easy visualizations, statistics and context on industry trends could motivate employers, especially those with limited capacity, to benchmark their performance and introduce meaningful safety improvements.

When it comes to transparency, what is disclosed counts, but how can be even more crucial. Employees checking the safety of their workplace will benefit from comparable scores, maps and rankings to put the information into context. Analysts conducting more sophisticated research will need to access and cross complex data sets.

OSHA should strive to build a disclosure system that is simple, user-centered and layered to meet the needs of a diverse audience.

Much can happen by disclosing and connecting data employers are already collecting. After all, OSHA is simply putting existing information to work to protect American workers. This is the right thing to do, not to mention smart public policy, all at a negligible cost to industry.

Elena Fagotto is director of research at Harvard Kennedy School’s Transparency Policy Project. Follow the project at @SunshinePolicy — www.transparencypolicy.net.